Skip to comments.Ground-Breaking New Book Offers Scientific Reasoning for Cold Fusion Energy
Posted on 05/08/2013 10:47:40 AM PDT by Kevmo
Ground-Breaking New Book Offers Scientific Reasoning for Cold Fusion Energy
Written by Dr. Stoyan Sarg, Structural Physics of Nuclear Fusion offers a new and compelling understanding of the physical process.
Toronto, ON -- (SBWIRE) -- 05/07/2013 -- Following a diligent period of research and development, Canadas Dr. Stoyan Sarg is delighted to announce the launch of his new book Structural Physics of Nuclear Fusion.
This latest book is a continuation of the original approach used in Sargs Basic Structures of Matter - Supergravitation Unified Theory (BSM-SG), published by in 2002, where the feasibility of cold fusion was predicted. The remarkable advances in cold fusion during the last few years prompted a new book to focus on the problems that bother many theorists and researchers.
Using the atomic models derived in BSM-SG theory, Sarg theoretically shows that overcoming the Coulomb barrier does not require a temperature of millions of degrees, rather an accessible temperature by using properly selected isotopes and technical methods. Furthermore, it is possible to obtain nuclear energy with a lack of minimum radioactive by-products.
The book also provides a method for analysis of the cold fusion (LENR) experiments using the BSM-SG models, as well as a selection of isotopes suitable for a more efficient energy yield with a minimum of radioactivity. Finally, it focuses on practical considerations for selection of the technical method and the reaction environment.
The cold fusion might be an environmentally safer replacement of the nuclear power based on enriched uranium-235. It also has a potential of a delocalized energy source with much lower cost, says Sarg.
Structural Physics of Nuclear Fusion is available from Amason.com in paperback (ISBN9781482620030) and Kindle versions (ISBN9780973051582).
A video of a talk at the International Scientific Conference in 2012 preceding the publishing of the new book, is available here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3gJp8rLHWg
A scientific paper is available here: http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Essays/View/4805
**The author is available for media interviews.
About Stoyan Sarg - Sargoytchev Stoyan Sarg - Sargoytchev, a Bulgarian born Canadian, holds an engineering diploma and a PhD in Physics. From 1976 to 1990 he was a scientist at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, working on space projects coordinated by the program Intercosmos, established by the former Soviet Union in collaboration with European countries. From 1990 he was a visiting scientist at Cornell University for two years and worked on NSF project at Arecibo Observatory, PR.
In 1992 he took scientific positions in Canadian government institutions and universities working on space and atmospheric research projects. Paying attention to unexplained phenomena and unsolved problems in Physics, he arrived at an original idea about space, matter and energy that he elaborated in his treatise BSM-SG. Stoyan Sarg has over 70 scientific publications in English and Russian languages, four US patents, and four scientific books in English. He is an emeritus member of the Society for Scientific Exploration and a Distinguished scientific advisor to the World Institute for Scientific Exploration.
The Cold Fusion/LENR Ping List
I remain skeptical, but would love to see my skepticism blasted away by the power created by cold fusion.
Let’s hope it’s not the same peers that reviewed all that University of East Anglia Climate Change Bull Obama.
According to Kevmo, Rossi had cold fusion working two years ago and we would just see by October that year all the cold fusion devices Rossi had sold to all kinds of people.
That was two years ago...so far, nothing. Just more perpetration of the fraud.
According to Kevmo, Rossi had cold fusion working two years ago
***According to Rossi, not Kevmo. Typical lie. Typical lack of manners to mention another freeper without pinging him. Typical flame baiting material, noting that it was guys like the toad who got the last thread pulled.
Thanks 4 Bumping The Thread T4BTT
There is more scientific evidence for cold fusion than for man caused global warming.
Interesting observation. At this point I think I’d agree with that statement. The sick thing in both fields is the presence of “scientific consensus”.
Everyone can easily accept the idea that the Elites (billionaires) can put pressure on our Court system to keep Obama in office yet these same people can’t believe that these same billionaires can keep something off the open market.
Free energy would make a world of free people almost instantly. It would cause disruptions in the stock market and national economies like you wouldn’t believe. It would disrupt everyone’s financial plans, not something the people in power are yearning for.
There’s more people working on this than just Rossi. Dozens and dozens are.
“This latest book is a continuation of the original approach used in Sargs Basic Structures of Matter - Supergravitation Unified Theory (BSM-SG), published by in 2002, where the feasibility of cold fusion was predicted. The remarkable advances in cold fusion during the last few years prompted a new book to focus on the problems that bother many theorists and researchers.”
“the problems”.... is that a few wires in a beaker is still just that. It can’t be reproduced reliably and in the case of Rossi’s Mystical, Magical, Pixie Dust Powered E-cats not at all.
But so what? Another book has been written.
Your home unit is on the way! You may expect delivery at 2:00 a.m.,November, never......or later.
It works now! [we just can’t show you, or tell you about it, or demonstrate it, or tell you who else bought the thousands we claim]
Someone writing a book is considered great progress toward flooding the world with free energy so we don’t really need to actually see anything, just believe the hype machine.
In case you failed to notice, this thread is not about Rossi.
And have you bothered to actually READ any of them??? The data for LENR is solid, with many well-done studies available.
I'm not all that interested in theory, as theory means squat as to the scientific reality of a topic. So, once again I recommend Charles Beaudette's book "Excess Heat", which does a great job of covering the experimental evidence proving CF exists and works.
Sure it is. It is always about Rossi. Do you really think we are so stupid or gullible as to allow this type of propaganda to be posted now only to be used later is support of Rossi? We know in a few weeks Kevmo will post that previous articles have been posted “proving” Rossi’s claims. Kemvo has done this before.
Stoyan Sarg has claimed Rossi is the real deal and this article is about Stoyan Sar, ergo, this article is about Rossi.
Rossi is a fraud that made wild claims to have a working system that has been evaluated and sold to many people, per Kevmo’s posts.
“The data for LENR is solid”
No, it is not, and you are no expert in nuclear physics to make such a statement.
“which does a great job of covering the experimental evidence proving CF exists and works. “
Not a single solitary cold fusion device has ever been independently proven. Not a single one.
If there had then there would be billions of dollars thrown at productizing it into a trillion dollar industry.
“Someone writing a book is considered great progress toward flooding the world with free energy “
The only energy that book represents if we were to burn it.
No, and one doesn't need to be.
What I am is an excellent experimentalist with deep knowledge of measurements, both nuclear and chemical. I am more than sufficiently qualified to examine the experimental processes run, the data yielded, and the quality of the work done.
The very best evidence comes from plain old chemical measurements....specifically measurement of heat by calorimetry, and the before and after concentrations of helium by mass spectrometry, both of which are straightforward chemical measurements. The proof is there, and covered suffiently well in Beaudette's book so that even a layman can understand.
Define “experimentalist”. You obviously do not understand nuclear science or what you are reading. If had expert level knowledge you could see what is missing from all those “layman’s” descriptions. Unfortunately, laymen never see what is missing and believe what they are being given is everything they need to know.
If cold fusions worked as easily as it is has been portrayed then cold fusions devices would be everywhere. You “layman’s” knowledge has failed the common sense test.
As far as science goes, they certainly have. That you make this statement simply proves your ignorance. The data is there. Read it for yourself. A comment which I recommend to any lurkers interested in the topic. Don't believe me, don't believe Kevmo, check out the evidence for yourselves.
Again, those without nuclear engineering or physics background wouldn’t know what they are reading. Just as with you. Just as if someone read articles from years back with alchemy. We know better now but if you were to read those articles of yesterday today you might think turning materials into gold was possible. We know better now because we know what was missing from the equations.
Again, your statement that cold fusion works and is provable is ridiculous as it doesn’t pass the common sense test of where are all these cold fusion devices if it is so provable. Where? Show us one.
Thanks 4 Bumping The Thread T4BTT
Free energy would make a world of free people almost instantly.
***It won’t be free, just cheaper & more accessible than gasoline, coal, solar and several other sources.
I know that. Comparatively it will be free. Ever run the number on how much in taxes alone you pay per year for energy?
The author is plainly supportive of the claims of “cold fusion”, fair enough, he has his opinions. But in conclusion he blames the skeptics for demanding the wrong proofs from the P-F experimenters.
The skeptical scientists demanded a nuclear explanation, says the author, while the F-P was a non nuclear phenomenon. The chemists vs. the nuclear physicists and never the twain shall meet.
It is into the F-P experiments that Rossi tries to include himself with p.r., imaginary working models, a new and equally inexplicable science but with a secret!
The author seems to want to throw the burden of proof onto the shoulders of the skeptics, “prove me wrong!”, instead of recognizing that without a clear understanding of what is occurring the "cold fusion" folk have a nice lab experiment and a question not a world saving technology.
I design instrumentation to make physical and chemical measurements. PhD chemistry, minor NUCLEAR SCIENCE.
"You obviously do not understand nuclear science or what you are reading."
LOL. I understand NS quite well. It's been a while since I dug out my hand-dandy "Chart of the Nuclides", or calculated a mass deficit, but I certainly could do so. More important, I understand nuclear instrumentation and nuclear measurements.
"Ifyou had expert level knowledge you could see what is missing from all those laymans descriptions.
And if you had bothered to read Beaudette's book, you would know that he covers the experimental work in quite sufficient depth to satisfy any qualified hard science reader, and he provides references to the original papers, just as any good hard science book would. I've read the original papers, not "layman's descriptions".
"Unfortunately, laymen never see what is missing and believe what they are being given is everything they need to know.
See above. I'm no "layman".
But while we're at this, how about you telling us YOUR bona-fides in science.
No, it started out as a book praised by many, read by none.
Typical change of subject. There is a difference between successfully engineering a commercial device, and a device that works sufficiently well to prove a scientific principle. Show you one??? Read the research papers, there are many there. Celani demonstrated one at the last National Instruments confab.
You mean "not read by you", do you not? I ask the question again...have you read ANY book (or research paper) on the experimental evidence of cold fusion??? My guess is......NO. Of course that is the standard state for the naysayers on these threads.
So read all the monographs and competing theories you wish but you'll have no better understanding of what the F-P effect than anyone else.
I'm for certain not going to chase your “book of the moment”.
I’ve found when someone starts touting their extensive credentials and the number of books they’ve supposedly read the reality is much less, very much less.
But while we’re at this, how about you telling us YOUR bona-fides in science.
***Don’t hold your breath
Bump and LOL
Hmmmm. Mind telling us which ones?? That certainly is not an accurate description of either Storms or Beaudette's books, which don't cover "theory" at all, but focus on experimental results.
"So read all the monographs and competing theories you wish but you'll have no better understanding of what the F-P effect than anyone else."
I don't read books on "theory", because theory is like assholes, everybody has one. I focus on experimental data, as that is what provides proof.
"I'm for certain not going to chase your book of the moment."
And thus remain ignorant. Willful ignorance = stupidity.
Actually, my credentials are far more extensive than the few I've listed here. I've worked on a lot of things in forty years of scientific practice. That is what I love about the instrument design biz..you never know what new field of technology you will be required to master in order to make the measurements folks want to have made.
He does a good job describing the mindsets of both and even tries to explain the many failed attempts to reproduce the early results of F-P by saying,
“The insistence that science requires a general reproducibility represents a kind of duck-pond thinking”.
The one criteria that imposes some discipline Beaudette dismisses as herd..flock? mentality.
If a person is looking for background information on lenr, canr, cold fusion that's not cold or fusion or whatever is the latest term, then his book is at least the equal of Wikipedia.
You can make whatever claims you wish, and I can buy whatever degree I want.
“And thus remain ignorant. Willful ignorance = stupidity.”
When the personal insults start I know the person making claims has recognized their failure. And I see no reason to respond further to such.
LOL. That part of it is strictly incidental to his cataloging of the experimental science of LENR. I'd say you've been VERY guilty of selective reading. Check the page counts of descriptions of experiments and results vs those pertaining to the sociology of skeptopathy.
But for the lurkers, don't believe me OR CYC. Read it and decide for youselves.
"The one criteria that imposes some discipline Beaudette dismisses as herd..flock? mentality."
Of course, as you and the skeptpaths sell it, that sounds "really bad". But any real scientist knows that 100% reproducibility of ANY experiment simply doesn't happen in the real world. The LENR phenomenon is difficult to make happen, and the percentage of successful experiments was, at first, a good bit less than 50%. LENR researchers combatted that problem by running many cells simultaneously, with slightly different conditions. Some cells showed consistent excess heat, others didn't (and thus served as controls). But over the years the precentage of reproducible experiments has increased (which is NOT what would happen if the effect were due to random error). Once the percentage of successful runs exceeded 50% of experiments (which many prominent skeptics said was all that was necessary for proof), those same skeptics "moved the goal posts" and began claiming (as you have) that experiments had to be 100% reproducible.....a requirement that is ridiculous on it's face.